Weep Over Jerusalem?

[JackSparrow]

Precisely !

There seem to be only two answers :

1. God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself in order to overthrow it .

2. God doesn't permit evil , it just happens ! He has no control or say over the future , such is Gods nature that He must take risks in order to be Love ....


I know which one is scriptural .

As you know, I am not a Calvinist,. I go with option 1 - mostly. I do not believe any non calvinist will go with option 2 unless they are nuts (IMO).

God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to himself, Why ? Why in order to overthrow it if he could of just of not permitted it in the first place.

I rather think along the line of God permitted man some free will ( I know you will hate this ). Adam had two options sin or not sin. He did not have the option of be more good or sinless. Why did God permit Adam to make a wrong choice. One answer would be he did not want robots but genuine love. Another would be that it was the only way God could reveal more of himself to man. How could God show his all powerfulness if man never disobeyed ?


So I believe God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself. He did not decree evil. As for the reasons, I expect there are more.

 

[gmm4j]

As you know, I am not a Calvinist,. I go with option 1 - mostly. I do not believe any non calvinist will go with option 2 unless they are nuts (IMO).

God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to himself, Why ? Why in order to overthrow it if he could of just of not permitted it in the first place.

I rather think along the line of God permitted man some free will ( I know you will hate this ). Adam had two options sin or not sin. He did not have the option of be more good or sinless. Why did God permit Adam to make a wrong choice. One answer would be he did not want robots but genuine love. Another would be that it was the only way God could reveal more of himself to man. How could God show his all powerfulness if man never disobeyed ?


So I believe God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself. He did not decree evil. As for the reasons, I expect there are more.

Amen Jack!

 

[JackSparrow]

Option 1
"God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself "

Permitting evil rather than decreeing evil, does this not imply man has free will, thus blasting Calvinism apart.

Option 2
Complete straw man statement.

Stated very bluntly, the Arminian position is "God did not make men puppets or robots". Every thing else flows out from there.

Anyone agree/disagree ?

 

[cygnusx1]

Option 1
"God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself "

Permitting evil rather than decreeing evil, does this not imply man has free will, thus blasting Calvinism apart.

You seem to display a complete lack of understanding the Reformed position , Gods decree is both efficient and permissive .

Option 2
Complete straw man statement.

Stated very bluntly, the Arminian position is "God did not make men puppets or robots". Every thing else flows out from there.

Anyone agree/disagree ?

How is it a straw man statement ?

You are acquainted with the modern philosophy of a risk taking God ?

 

[JackSparrow]

You seem to display a complete lack of understanding the Reformed position , Gods decree is both efficient and permissive .

Agreed. Please help me out cos the more I read about it the less I know I know.

How is it a straw man statement ?

You are acquainted with the modern philosophy of a risk taking God ?

Actually no I am not. I never heard about Calvinism until I was about 35. Also I never heard in church about the modern philosophy you mention .

If you look at the Society of Evangelical Arminians web site you will find this philosophy missing.

However, perhaps you are correct. Most things in the UK seem watered down with an abundance of PC. So I wont dispute you on this point.

 

[janxharris]

Option 1
"God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself "

Permitting evil rather than decreeing evil, does this not imply man has free will, thus blasting Calvinism apart.

Option 2
Complete straw man statement.

Stated very bluntly, the Arminian position is "God did not make men puppets or robots". Every thing else flows out from there.

Anyone agree/disagree ?

I agree that God permitted evil. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by, '....with much suffering to Himself'.

I suppose the Calvinist's concern would be if were possible that the evil permitted could lead to God's defeat? If the free will permitted is to be truly free then would that include the possibility that God's plan could be thwarted? Was God overriding man's free will when various attempts were made by the Jews to seize Jesus (before the time appointed had come)?

John 10:39
Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

Notwithstanding the above, God's knowledge of all events in His creation must mean that His overall plan was assured and woven into the very tapestry of creation.

 

[janxharris]

You seem to display a complete lack of understanding the Reformed position , Gods decree is both efficient and permissive .

Not sure what you mean cygnusx1.

How is it a straw man statement ?

You are acquainted with the modern philosophy of a risk taking God ?

?

 

[cygnusx1]

I agree that God permitted evil. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by, '....with much suffering to Himself'.

I suppose the Calvinist's concern would be if were possible that the evil permitted could lead to God's defeat? If the free will permitted is to be truly free then would that include the possibility that God's plan could be thwarted? Was God overriding man's free will when various attempts were made by the Jews to seize Jesus (before the time appointed had come)?

John 10:39
Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

Notwithstanding the above, God's knowledge of all events in His creation must mean that His overall plan was assured and woven into the very tapestry of creation.

Not if you accept mans free will to do what God has never purposed , there , that would mean God is reduced to the "risk taking God" in order to uphold mans free will and Gods love ...... Allegedly !

Either God is subject to evil events such as the Fall or He is not , there is no middle ground.

 

[cygnusx1]

Not sure what you mean cygnusx1.




?

Simply there is variety in Gods will of decree , both efficient and permissive : God willingly permitted evil , God did not work evil for He is light in Him is no darkness , Yet He does efficiently cause Good , Every Good !

 

[JackSparrow]

Not if you accept mans free will to do what God has never purposed , there , that would mean God is reduced to the "risk taking God" in order to uphold mans free will and Gods love ...... Allegedly !

You appear to be going around in circles. Does 'permit' mean the same as 'decree' or not. Yes or no. What is your answer.

No Christian I have ever met, heard of or read about holds that God is reduced to the "risk taking God". Only those putting up straw-men mention this.

Did God decree his heart to be grieved as already discussed ? Yes or no, be definite instead a yes but long winded philosophy that really means no.

Either God is subject to evil events such as the Fall or He is not , there is no middle ground.

Yes there are plenty of middle grounds. God is infinite. You cygnusx1 are not. Start thinking outside the triangle. You have limited God's alternatives to your own finite conclusions.

Cygnusx1 -
2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. 4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
.....
33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

If I may be to the point, this is the problem with Calvinism. I.e "Oh it must one of two alternatives". C'mon - get real.


Stop going around in circles. Does 'permit' mean the same as 'decree' or not. Yes or no. What is your answer. Either it does NOT and man does have a finite amount of free will just as the Bible says over and over gain. Or you have a lot of editing to do to your Bible.

And no, man having a finite amount of free does NOT impinge on a sovereign omniscient God in any way. Only your finite mind.

 

[JackSparrow]

I agree that God permitted evil. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by, '....with much suffering to Himself'.

Genesis 6. states

5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.


Was God grieved ?
Did God predestine himself to be Grieved ?
Did God predestine every imagination and thoughts of man's heart to be evil continually ?
Did God make one huge fowl up that he repenteth of ?

Answer - Yes
1. What was the point of grieving himself ?

2. Who is this story aimed at if man is created/predestined by God to be evil continually.

3. Why does the Bible tell man to repent if they cannot as God made them to be evil continually.

4. What is the point of the great commission. Why does anyone bother to evangelize ?

5. Gen 6.12 "12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." Who corrupted his way ? Man or God ? When, at Creation or what this verse says ?. Is this one of many verses that has got it so wrong.

6. Gen 6:13 ".... and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Oh dear, oh dear, what a silly God. He wipes out man then has another go and what happens ? Third time lucky maybe. Is this what you believe ?

7. And so on....

Answer - No
Correct. Read the rest of the Bible to confirm.

I suppose the Calvinist's concern would be if were possible that the evil permitted could lead to God's defeat? If the free will permitted is to be truly free then would that include the possibility that God's plan could be thwarted? Was God overriding man's free will when various attempts were made by the Jews to seize Jesus (before the time appointed had come)?

John 10:39
Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

You have answered your own question with If the free will permitted is to be truly free. Find a non calvinist scholar who has ever made this ridiculous claim. Is God infinite ? Obviously yes. Is man infinite ? obviously no. Ok you might find some cranks on both sides who talk blatant drivel but not any respected theologian.

Calvinist Charles Spugeons's sermon 1516 is a good read. "Both sides ( Gods Sovereignty vs man's free will ) are in Holy writ and so must I preach both" he said. Could he figure out the paradox ? Read it for yourself.

Maybe bin the Bible as it seems so contradictory and divisive. After all look what science has achieved. Look at the inroads that mathematicians have made on the subject of infinity ( Google George Cantor). Are the likes of Dawkins correct after all - man is just a mechanistic process. Not random, not free in any measure but totally deterministic.

 

[JackSparrow]

...Gods decree is both efficient and permissive .

Simply there is variety in Gods will of decree , both efficient and permissive : God willingly permitted evil , God did not work evil for He is light in Him is no darkness , Yet He does efficiently cause Good , Every Good !

I do not understand you at all.

Decretive will - Let there be light - and there could be no other than be light. I.e Total command and control.

Permissive will - As you say God permitted evil. Not made it happen. ( least thats what I think you are saying).

Or
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

So

1. Decretive will is NOT permissive will - unless God wills against his will.

2. You say "Simply there is variety in Gods will of decree ". Ok List them please and provide Biblical evidence.

 

[JackSparrow]

Just been thinking over a cup of tea.

If one holds that God's will is so efficient to the point of being a decree then surly that makes one a suprelapsarian double predestination believer I.e a hyper Calvinist.

Perhaps the terms 'efficient' and 'sufficient' need some explanation.

 

[drstevej]

Supralapsarianism is not hyper Calvinism. Here is a good summary of Calvinism and this issue.

Infralapsarians were in the majority at the Synod of Dort. The Arminians tried to depict all the Calvinists as representatives of the "repulsive" supralapsarian doctrine. Four attempts were made at Dort to condemn the supralapsarian view, but the efforts were unsuccessful. Although the Canons of Dort do not deal with the order of the divine decrees, they are infralapsarian in the sense that the elect are "chosen from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction" (I,7; cf.I,1). The reprobate "are passed by in the eternal decree" and God "decreed to leave (them) in the common misery into which they have willfully plunged themselves" and "to condemn and punish them forever...for all their sins" (I,15).

Defenders of supralapsarianism continued after Dort. The chairman of the Westminister Assembly, William Twisse, was a supralapsarian but the Westminister standards do not favor either position. Although supralapsarianism never received confessional endorsement within the Reformed churches, it has been tolerated within the confessional boundaries. In 1905 the Reformed churches of the Netherlands and the Christian Reformed Church in 1908 adopted the Conclusions of Utrecht, which stated that "our Confessional Standards admittedly follow the infralapsarian presentation in respect to the doctrine of election, but that it is evident...that this in no wise intended to exclude or condemn the supralapsarian presentation." Recent defenders of the supralapsarian position have been Gerhardus Vos, Herman Hoeksema, and G H Kersten.

F H Klooster
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary)

 

[JackSparrow]

Supralapsarianism is not hyper Calvinism. Here is a good summary of Calvinism and this issue.

Hi drstevej

Can you thrown some light on Decretive will vs permissive will and efficiency ?

 

[drstevej]

Decretive Will
Permissive Will
Preceptive will
efficiency

 

[cygnusx1]

Hi drstevej

Can you thrown some light on Decretive will vs permissive will and efficiency ?

Gods permissive will , ie, allowing evil is part of Gods decree , it isn't separate . Sin could not even exist if God didn't allow it , it is an act of the will to allow or permit a thing !

 

[JackSparrow]

Gods permissive will , ie, allowing evil is part of Gods decree , it isn't separate . Sin could not even exist if God didn't allow it , it is an act of the will to allow or permit a thing !

I have not read drstevj's articles yet.

However, I think cygnusx1 you are hedging. If it is his decree then you are saying in effect God is the author of sin since he decreed it. You have seen some flaws in Calvinism and now digging a big hole.



Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[JackSparrow]

Gods permissive will , ie, allowing evil is part of Gods decree , it isn't separate . Sin could not even exist if God didn't allow it , it is an act of the will to allow or permit a thing !

"it isn't separate"

Yes it is. Here are quotes from the Calvinist web site CARM

http://carm.org/decretive-will
The decretive will is God's direct will where he causes something to be.

Permissive Will | What is Permissive Wil? | Define Permissive Will | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
The Permissive Will of God is that will which God does NOT decree to occur, nor is it his will since it is not in accordance with his Law... God allows man to rebel against him,

Efficacy | What is Efficacy? | Define Efficacy | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
he Preceptive Will of God is the will of God for man. For example, God wills that man does not sin, that we do not lie, do not steal, etc.


In my non calvinist opinion this is good stuff and matches what I have always been taught in my non calvinist church upbringing. I am pleased there is some common ground between my non Calvinist Christian up bringing and a Christian Calvinist web site.

Presuming CARM is a moderate Calvinist site ( please post otherwise ) then Cygnusx1 you must be at least high Calvinist or some way towards the hyper position.


What really cheers me up is a website with clear plain as day definitions.


Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[JackSparrow]

Decretive Will
Permissive Will
Preceptive will
efficiency

Thank you for the links.